8. Eliminate the late archery deer hunt at Brunet Island state park.
9. Eliminate the special state park hunting season and allow hunting during all normal deer seasons at Cadiz Springs Recreation Area.
10. Establish a special migratory bird hunt with a 1:00 p.m. closure, regulations, and modify refuges at Mead wildlife area, Wood, Portage and Marathon counties and Lake Mills wildlife area, Jefferson County.
11. Clarify the definition of legal firearm types for hunting.
12. Create flexibility in the methods for issuing left-over turkey hunting permits.
13. Create flexibility to register wild turkeys by methods other than in person at registration stations.
14. Allow the use of electronic calls for turkey hunting by certain holders of disabled hunting permits.
15. Allow the use of dogs for turkey hunting during the fall season statewide.
16. Require the registration of sharp-tailed grouse harvest.
17. Allow hunting during special turkey hunts by holders Class B disabled hunting permits that are valid for hunting from a vehicle and issued for more than one year.
18. Eliminate the Nelson-Travino Mississippi River closed area in Buffalo County.
19. Reduce the size of Dike 17 waterfowl refuge and allow trapping and firearm deer hunting (Jackson County).
20. Reduce the size of Vernon Marsh waterfowl refuge because certain areas are no longer needed as goose refuge (Waukesha County).
Small Business Impact
Pursuant to s.
227.114
, Stats., it is not anticipated that the proposed rules will have a significant economic impact on small businesses.
Environmental Analysis
The Department has made a preliminary determination that this action does not involve significant adverse environmental effects and does not need an environmental analysis under ch.
NR 150
, Wis. Adm. Code. However, based on the comments received, the Department may prepare an environmental analysis before proceeding with the proposal. This environmental review document would summarize the Department's consideration of the impacts of the proposal and reasonable alternatives.
Fiscal Estimate
Summary
Mandatory registration of sharp-tailed grouse will not require new expenses because a harvest reporting system is already in place, its use is optional under current rules. Similarly, wild turkey harvest is recorded at department registration stations and telephone registration, if pursued, would replace the current system resulting in no new expenses. It is anticipated that costs will be less than under the current system. Startup costs for administering a bobcat harvest registration system by telephone are anticipated to be $3,000, similar to the cost of the current Canada goose telephone registration system. Annual costs would be less than $1,000 and can be absorbed within the department's current budget.
State fiscal effect
An increase in costs that may be possible to absorb within the agency's budget.
Local government fiscal effect
None.
Fund sources affected
SEG
Notice of Hearing
Pharmacy Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Pharmacy Examining Board in ss.
15.08 (5) (b)
,
227.11 (2)
and
450.02 (3) (d)
, Stats., the Pharmacy Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an emergency rule to repeal s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
, relating to the practical examination.
Hearing Information
Date:
April 8, 2009
Time:
9:30 a.m.
Location:
1400 East Washington Avenue
(Enter at 55 North Dickinson Street)
Room 121A
Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing and Submission of Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by April 13, 2009, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Copies of Rule
Copies of this rule are available upon request to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, or by email at
pamela.haack@wisconsin.gov
.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Regulation and Licensing
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
The board is authorized under s.
450.02 (3) (d)
, Stats., to promulgate rules necessary for the administration of ch.
450
, Stats., which includes approving examinations to determine whether an applicant is competent to engage in the practice of pharmacy. Refer also to s.
450.04 (1)
, Stats.
Related statute or rule
Ch.
Phar 4
sets forth the board's procedures for administering, scoring, handling claims of examination error and responding to requests to retake the examination.
Plain language analysis
SECTION 1. In this emergency rule, the board repeals s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
, which relates to the practical examination required for licensure of pharmacists. Under the current rule, the board administers a practical examination to determine an applicant's competence in compounding and dispensing medications, which includes consultation of patients. The board has determined that this examination is no longer needed because the competencies tested in the examination are also tested in two other national examinations that applicants are required to take in order to obtain a license in Wisconsin.
Comparison with federal regulations
Federal Medicaid law requires a patient consultation on new prescriptions.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Iowa:
Iowa does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Illinois:
Illinois does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Michigan:
Michigan does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Minnesota:
Minnesota does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
It was the board's custom over time to review examination performance at each full board meeting for the examination that occurred the day before its meetings. As a result of apparent trends that emerged from these post-examination reviews, the board undertook an analysis of aggregate examination pass rates as it discussed the ongoing need for a practical consultation examination and found rates to be significantly higher for graduates of the University of Wisconsin-Madison than for other pharmacy schools. The board also reviewed experience in other states and found that Wisconsin is one of only four states in the nation that continues to require a practical consultation examination. One of the implications suggested by the board as a result of its review is that the examination creates a barrier to licensure in Wisconsin, and that the benefits of the examination do not justify its costs.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
It is anticipated that elimination of the examination will have a positive impact on small business by yielding an enlarged pool of licensed pharmacists available for hire.
Section
227.137
, Stats., requires an "agency" to prepare an economic impact report before submitting the proposed rule-making order to the Wisconsin Legislative Council. The Department of Regulation and Licensing is not included as an "agency" in this section.
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector
The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Small Business Impact
These rules will have no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1)
, Stats.
Fiscal Estimate
The department estimates that the proposed rule will have no significant fiscal impact.
Finding of Emergency
The Pharmacy Examining Board finds that, under s.
227.24 (1)
, Stats., the repeal of s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
is required for the preservation of the public peace, health, safety and welfare.
Currently, under s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
, the board administers a practical examination to determine an applicant's competence in compounding and dispensing medications, which includes consultation of patients. The board has determined that this examination is no longer needed because the competencies tested in the examination are also tested in two other national examinations that applicants are required to take in order to obtain a license in Wisconsin. The board has also determined that the practical examination requirement may contribute to the shortage of pharmacists in Wisconsin.
First, under s.
Phar 4.02 (1)
and
(3)
, an applicant is required to take and pass the Multi-State Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination (MPJE) and the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX). Both of these examinations test competencies that relate to subject areas that are also tested in the practical examination. As a result, applicants are required to take an additional examination, and pay an additional examination fee. In some instances, this step may also result in a delay in the processing of applications for licensure.
Second, in reference to the shortage of pharmacists in Wisconsin, the board has found that populations in rural areas and in certain city neighborhoods are underserved. The board believes that, because of its practical examination requirement, potential applicants from other states are declining to seek licensure in Wisconsin. Wisconsin is one of only four states that require a practical examination. None of the states that border Wisconsin have a practical examination requirement.
Agency Contact Person
Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708; telephone 608-266-0495; email at
pamela.haack@ wisconsin.gov
.
Text of Emergency Rule
SECTION 1. Phar 4.02 (2) is repealed.
This emergency rule shall take effect on February 28, 2009.
Notice of Hearing
Pharmacy Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Pharmacy Examining Board in ss.
15.08 (5) (b)
,
227.11 (2)
and
450.02 (3) (d)
, Stats., the Pharmacy Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider permanent rules to repeal s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
, relating to the practical examination.
Hearing Information
Date:
April 8, 2009
Time:
9:30 a.m.
Location:
1400 East Washington Avenue
(Enter at 55 North Dickinson Street)
Room 121A
Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing and Submission of Written Comments
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by April 13, 2009, to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Copies of Proposed Rule
Copies of this proposed rule are available upon request to Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708, or by email at
pamela.haack@wisconsin.gov
.
Analysis Prepared by the Department of Regulation and Licensing.
Statutes interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
The board is authorized under s.
450.02 (3) (d)
, Stats., to promulgate rules necessary for the administration of ch.
450
, Stats., which includes approving examinations to determine whether an applicant is competent to engage in the practice of pharmacy. Refer also to s.
450.04 (1)
, Stats.
Related statute or rule
Ch.
Phar 4
sets forth the board's procedures for administering, scoring, handling claims of examination error and responding to requests to retake the examination.
Plain language analysis
SECTION 1. In this proposed rule-making order, the board proposes to repeal s.
Phar 4.02 (2)
, which relates to the practical examination required for licensure of pharmacists. Under the current rule, the board administers a practical examination to determine an applicant's competence in compounding and dispensing medications, which includes consultation of patients. The board has determined that this examination is no longer needed because the competencies tested in the examination are also tested in two other national examinations that applicants are required to take in order to obtain a license in Wisconsin.
Comparison with federal regulations
Federal Medicaid law requires a patient consultation on new prescriptions.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Iowa:
Iowa does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Illinois:
Illinois does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Michigan:
Michigan does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Minnesota:
Minnesota does not have a separate patient consultation examination requirement.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
It was the board's custom over time to review examination performance at each full board meeting for the examination that occurred the day before its meetings. As a result of apparent trends that emerged from these post-examination reviews, the board undertook an analysis of aggregate examination pass rates as it discussed the ongoing need for a practical consultation examination and found rates to be significantly higher for graduates of the University of Wisconsin-Madison than for other pharmacy schools. The board also reviewed experience in other states and found that Wisconsin is one of only four states in the nation that continues to require a practical consultation examination. One of the implications suggested by the board as a result of its review is that the examination creates a barrier to licensure in Wisconsin, and that the benefits of the examination do not justify its costs.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
It is anticipated that elimination of the examination will have a positive impact on small business by yielding an enlarged pool of licensed pharmacists available for hire.
Section
227.137
, Stats., requires an "agency" to prepare an economic impact report before submitting the proposed rule-making order to the Wisconsin Legislative Council. The Department of Regulation and Licensing is not included as an "agency" in this section.
Small Business Impact
These proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1)
, Stats.
Fiscal Estimate
The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Agency Contact Person
Pamela Haack, Paralegal, Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Legal Counsel, 1400 East Washington Avenue, Room 152, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708; telephone 608-266-0495; email at
pamela.haack@wisconsin.gov
.
Text of Proposed Rule
SECTION 1. Phar 4.02 (2) is repealed.
Notice of Hearing
Public Instruction
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That pursuant to ss.
115.43 (2) (c)
and
227.11 (2) (a)
, Stats., the Department of Public Instruction will hold a public hearing to consider proposed permanent rules amending Chapter
PI 22
, relating to precollege scholarships.
Hearing Information
March 30, 2009
Madison
1:30 – 2:30 p.m.
GEF 3 Building
125 South Webster St.
Room 041
The hearing site is fully accessible to people with disabilities. If you require reasonable accommodation to access the meeting, please contact Kevin Ingram, Director, Educational Opportunity Programs and Urban Education, at
kevin.ingram@dpi.wi.gov
, (414) 227-4413, or leave a message with the Teletypewriter (TTY) at (608) 267-2427 at least 10 days prior to the hearing date. Reasonable accommodation includes materials prepared in an alternative format, as provided under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Copies of Proposed Rule
Lori Slauson
Administrative Rules and Federal Grants Coordinator
Department of Public Instruction
125 South Webster Street
P.O. Box 7841
Madison, WI 53707
Submission of Written Comments
Written comments on the proposed rules received by Ms. Slauson at the above mail or email address no later than April 6, 2009, will be given the same consideration as testimony presented at the hearing.
Analysis Prepared by Department of Public Instruction
Statute interpreted
Statutory authority
Explanation of agency authority
Section
115.43 (2) (c)
, Stats., gives the department the authority, in consultation with postsecondary educational institutions, to promulgate rules establishing criteria for the review and approval of applications for scholarships under the precollege scholarship program.
Related statute or rule
N/A.
Plain language analysis
2007 Wisconsin Act 20
, the biennial budget bill, modified the Minority Group Pupil Precollege Scholarship Program under ss.
115.28 (23)
and
115.43
, Stats., to change the eligibility criteria from being a minority pupil to being an economically disadvantaged pupil.
The corresponding rules under ch.
PI 22
, Wis. Adm. Code, are being modified to reflect the statutory language and current administration of the program. In addition, the proposed rules clarify:
•
That precollege scholarships are
awarded
to economically disadvantaged pupils but
paid
to the postsecondary educational institution providing the precollege program in which the pupil is enrolled.
•
That the precollege program provided by the postsecondary educational institution must meet certain requirements in order to be eligible under the program.
•
That pupils do not have to apply to the department for a precollege scholarship, but must apply to a postsecondary educational institution offering a precollege program.
•
That pupils may receive three scholarship awards per year and are no longer limited to receiving only one scholarship per semester or summer.
Comparison with federal regulations
N/A
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota do not have rules relating to scholarships for economically disadvantaged children to attend precollege programs at postsecondary educational institutions.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
In addition to the modifications made as a result of
2007 Wisconsin Act 20
, modifications are made to clarify current practice and statutory intent. For instance, s.
115.43 (2) (b)
, Stats., requires that precollege scholarships be made on a competitive basis. It is unclear if it is the pupils or the postsecondary educational institutions that must compete. The current rules are also unclear. The rule modifications clarify that it is the postsecondary educational institutions that must meet certain requirements and thus "compete" for scholarship pupils to attend its institution and receive payment for those pupils.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business
N/A
Anticipated costs incurred by private sector
N/A
Small Business Impact
The proposed rules will have no significant economic impact on small businesses, as defined in s.
227.114 (1) (a)
, Stats.
Fiscal Estimate
Under s.
20.255 (3) (fz)
, Stats., precollege scholarships are awarded to eligible pupils that attend postsecondary educational institutions offering precollege programs designed to improve pupils' academic skills necessary for success in college and technical college studies.
The rule modifies criteria and procedures for awarding scholarships under this program. The rules will have no fiscal effect on local governments or small businesses as defined in s.
227.114 (1) (a)
, Stats.
The costs associated with administering this grant program will be absorbed by the department.
Agency Contact Person
Kevin Ingram, Director
Educational Opportunity Programs and Urban Education
Phone: (414) 227-4413
